Q9KM18
multicom
Q9KM18
full_length
Q9KM18
Results of Structure Prediction for Target Name: Q9KM18 ( Click 
)
Domain Boundary prediction ( View )
>Q9KM18: 1-127
| 1-60: |
M | A | V | A | I | Y | R | G | F | N | L | Q | S | A | A | N | S | T | E | I | W | Q | V | R | I | K | N | H | V | L | T | G | N | L | A | A | V | K | K | S | I | D | W | F | C | D | T | A | S | I | I | D | P | K | E | F | E | S | I | G |
| 61-119: |
Q | K | R | E | V | S | A | G | A | Q | E | Q | F | N | G | F | T | I | K | N | D | T | G | E | A | N | E | W | Y | C | F | F | N | G | R | L | I | K | G | S | K | I | A | I | Q | K | H | I | E | A | Y | L | V | A | R | Q | R | A | M | Q |
| 121-127: |
Q | Q | A | Q | Q | K | R |
| 1-60: |
C | C | H | H | H | H | C | C | E | E | E | E | C | C | C | C | C | C | C | E | E | E | E | E | E | C | C | C | E | E | E | E | E | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | C | C | C | C | E | E | C | C | C | H | H | H | H | H | H | C |
| 61-119: |
C | C | C | C | C | C | C | C | C | C | H | H | C | C | C | E | E | E | E | E | C | C | C | C | C | C | C | E | E | E | E | E | E | C | H | H | C | C | C | C | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H |
| 121-127: |
H | H | H | H | H | C | C |
| |
| | H(Helix): 50(39.37%) | E(Strand): 28(22.05%) | C(Coil): 49(38.58%) |
| 1-60: |
E | E | E | B | B | B | B | B | B | B | B | E | B | E | E | E | E | E | E | E | B | E | B | E | B | E | E | E | E | B | E | B | E | B | E | B | B | B | E | B | B | E | B | B | B | E | B | E | B | B | B | E | B | E | E | B | E | E | B | E |
| 61-119: |
E | E | E | E | E | E | E | E | E | E | E | E | B | E | E | B | E | B | E | B | B | E | E | E | E | E | E | B | B | B | B | B | B | B | E | B | B | E | B | E | E | E | E | B | E | E | B | B | E | E | B | B | B | E | E | B | E | E | E | E |
| 121-127: |
E | E | E | E | E | E | E |
| |
| | e(Exposed): 75(59.06%) | b(Buried): 52(40.94%) |
| 1-60: |
N | N | T | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N |
| 61-119: |
N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N |
| 121-127: |
N | N | T | T | T | T | T |
| |
| | N(Normal): 121(95.28%) | T(Disorder): 6(4.72%) |
Predicted contact map and distance map
|
Predicted distance map
|
|
Predicted contact map
|
Probability to Precision
| Long-Range |
Average probability |
Predicted precision |
| TopL/5 |
0.47 |
48.27 |
| TopL/2 |
0.30 |
32.96 |
Note: The linear model (Average probability vs Predicted precision) was trained on CASP14 dataset
|
Predicted Top 1 Tertiary structure
|
|
|
| Long-Range |
Precision |
| TopL/5 |
44.00 |
| TopL/2 |
21.88 |
| TopL |
11.02 |
| Top2L |
7.09 |
| Alignment |
Number |
| N |
214 |
| Neff |
28 |
|
Model comparsion
| Model |
TM-score |
| Model 2 |
0.8446 |
| Model 3 |
0.8487 |
| Model 4 |
0.9419 |
| Model 5 |
0.7823 |
| Average |
0.85438 |
Radius Gyration
|
Similar pdbs
| PDB |
TM-score |
| 6ii2 |
0.51260 |
| 6q0x |
0.50286 |
| 2j7a |
0.49275 |
| 5d0f |
0.49267 |
| 1fs9 |
0.48960 |
|
Note: The model is built by ab initio method, no significant templates are found!
|
Predicted Top 2 Tertiary structure
|
|
|
| Long-Range |
Precision |
| TopL/5 |
40.00 |
| TopL/2 |
18.75 |
| TopL |
10.24 |
| Top2L |
7.09 |
| Alignment |
Number |
| N |
214 |
| Neff |
28 |
|
Model comparsion
| Model |
TM-score |
| Model 1 |
0.8446 |
| Model 3 |
0.8613 |
| Model 4 |
0.8016 |
| Model 5 |
0.9330 |
| Average |
0.86013 |
Radius Gyration
|
Similar pdbs
| PDB |
TM-score |
| 6hq6 |
0.52294 |
| 6hq8 |
0.50853 |
| 2vnu |
0.50744 |
| 3lc6 |
0.50690 |
| 4xgi |
0.50647 |
|
Note: The model is built by ab initio method, no significant templates are found!
|
Predicted Top 3 Tertiary structure
|
|
|
| Long-Range |
Precision |
| TopL/5 |
40.00 |
| TopL/2 |
17.19 |
| TopL |
10.24 |
| Top2L |
6.69 |
| Alignment |
Number |
| N |
214 |
| Neff |
28 |
|
Model comparsion
| Model |
TM-score |
| Model 1 |
0.8487 |
| Model 2 |
0.8613 |
| Model 4 |
0.8708 |
| Model 5 |
0.7825 |
| Average |
0.84082 |
Radius Gyration
|
Similar pdbs
| PDB |
TM-score |
| 5v7p |
0.49241 |
| 3ubr |
0.49196 |
| 4wjy |
0.49074 |
| 2rf7 |
0.49040 |
| 5csl |
0.48993 |
|
Note: The model is built by ab initio method, no significant templates are found!
|
Predicted Top 4 Tertiary structure
|
|
|
| Long-Range |
Precision |
| TopL/5 |
44.00 |
| TopL/2 |
20.31 |
| TopL |
11.81 |
| Top2L |
8.27 |
| Alignment |
Number |
| N |
214 |
| Neff |
28 |
|
Model comparsion
| Model |
TM-score |
| Model 1 |
0.9419 |
| Model 2 |
0.8016 |
| Model 3 |
0.8708 |
| Model 5 |
0.7392 |
| Average |
0.83837 |
Radius Gyration
|
Similar pdbs
| PDB |
TM-score |
| 5d0f |
0.50761 |
| 2q66 |
0.50189 |
| 4wjy |
0.50002 |
| 3tor |
0.49855 |
| 6p73 |
0.49570 |
|
Note: The model is built by ab initio method, no significant templates are found!
|
Predicted Top 5 Tertiary structure
|
|
|
| Long-Range |
Precision |
| TopL/5 |
44.00 |
| TopL/2 |
18.75 |
| TopL |
11.02 |
| Top2L |
7.87 |
| Alignment |
Number |
| N |
214 |
| Neff |
28 |
|
Model comparsion
| Model |
TM-score |
| Model 1 |
0.7823 |
| Model 2 |
0.9330 |
| Model 3 |
0.7825 |
| Model 4 |
0.7392 |
| Average |
0.80925 |
Radius Gyration
|
Similar pdbs
| PDB |
TM-score |
| 6hq8 |
0.53181 |
| 2ix1 |
0.52354 |
| 6hq6 |
0.52161 |
| 6f3h |
0.50860 |
| xx09 |
0.50709 |
|
Note: The model is built by ab initio method, no significant templates are found!
|
References
[1] Hou, J., Wu, T., Cao, R., & Cheng, J. (2019). Protein tertiary structure modeling driven by deep learning and contact distance prediction in CASP13. bioRxiv, 552422.
[2] Li, J., Deng, X., Eickholt, J., & Cheng, J. (2013). Designing and benchmarking the MULTICOM protein structure prediction system. BMC structural biology, 13(1), 2.
[3] Cheng, J., Li, J., Wang, Z., Eickholt, J., & Deng, X. (2012). The MULTICOM toolbox for protein structure prediction. BMC bioinformatics, 13(1), 65.
[4] Wang, Z., Eickholt, J., & Cheng, J. (2010). MULTICOM: a multi-level combination approach to protein structure prediction and its assessments in CASP8. Bioinformatics, 26(7), 882-888.
